Monday, April 09, 2007

A Sabbath with Soap

The missus, Dakota and I had a wonderful Easter Weekend. We spent much of Friday evening and Saturday looking for various items for Dakota’s baby needs (rockers, baby wipe warmers and that sort of thing). We also spent time organizing her room and others. I finally got one of our Fibber McGees organized. It looks nice. Also, we took time to hang up various pictures in the library, particularly my framed Oxford Pub Crawl Poster which I purchased in Oxford, England nearly three years ago (Hi, Dr. Y!). I don’t know: there is something slightly Zen about nailing a poster of Oxford pubs up during Easter. Ya know watta mean?

We were planning to attend Fellowship’s 8:30am Sunrise Easter Service but the morning flurries suggested that Fellowship probably would have that service in doors. Therefore, we decided to give ourselves an extra hour of sleep and go to the 10am service. Again, it’s quiet interesting to decide to SLEEP-IN on Easter morning.

Not that I didn’t work. I had to be there around 9am to work. Oh, yes! We were quite busy that morning. Most churches are rather busy on Easter Sunday. Even more so for Fellowship. Filled to the brim. Work, work, work. I guess being in a ministerial family I learned early on that a Sabbath rest on Sunday did not apply to ministers even in conservative churches. It will never cease to amaze me when “Bible-believing” conservative Christians will walk up to another Christian and tell him or her that they should not be working or exerting on the Sabbath. ... Have they not read the NT? Or is that a silly question? Nah, I’m not going to soapbox my Sabbath issues; I have other soap to sell.

Regardless, the Fellowship Easter Service that we attended was very good. Pastor Young gave a good evangelistic message. I suppose with all the family members visiting church members and all the “once-a-year” church goers there, an evangelistic sermon is appropriate.

The missus and I invited two friends (who are looking to move to Euless) to the Fellowship service. Both of these individuals are graduated seminary students. I must tell you that they loved the service. They were ecstatic! The missus wanted to tell them they did something special for the Easter service but that wasn’t the case. In fact, the service was somewhat subdued compared with most.

I really wish more seminary students (or more Southern Baptists for that matter) would attend a few services at Fellowship Church. Pastor Ed Young and Fellowship (like Rick Warren and Saddleback) are one of the top ministries in the country to be criticized by evangelicals.

Why shouldn’t they be criticized?

-They have a highly effective ministry
-They are great equippers of pastors and ministers
-They have an extremely high level of Baptisms (from un-churched people and families!)
-They are highly professional
-They are quite loving and merciful
-They are reaching the “lowest” sections of society (“ladies of ill repute” and their “bosses”)
-They are reaching youth at enormous levels
-They use their facilities and resources to assist other ministers and ministries
-They provide deep, mature and hardcore discipleship (those who think it is fluff are ignorant!)
-They are very conservative theologically


And most importantly ...

-They are having tremendous success by using methods that other Christians (who are not having “success”) claim to be ineffective!

It’s this last one which really gets the traditionalists. They believe that only the methods they first learned as children in their culture work and that contemporary methods are not only ineffective but dangerous to Christendom. Therefore, when evidence of the opposite is produced they must claim that Warren and Young “convert people to the Christian by Satan” (cf. Luke 11:14-23).

The irony of the matter is that while many traditionalists look at contemporary churches as bowing to the cultural world, it is actually the traditionalists who are bowing to the cultural world – their own! No, the first way of “doing church” that you experienced is not a method that goes back to the New Testament. It probably goes only as far back as your parent’s generation or, at most, the generation of the oldest person in the church.

The vast majority of those who desire to contemporize the methods of the Church and the spread of the gospel are doing so in order to fulfill the Great Commissions.

Don’t burden the lost world with translatory obstacles. Communicate the Gospel through their culture and not your own.

It’s sort of like trying to disciple people through the Scriptures by first teaching them how to read Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. To translate the Bible into English would be considered bowing to the English cultural world (cf. the Latin Vulgate and the Roman Catholic Church pre-1965).

Do you recall the song, “Gimme that Old Time Religion”? Remember the line, “It was good for Paul and Silas”? Well, here is some news for you: it wasn’t.

Don’t make an “idol” out of your methodological preference.

Now do traditional methods not work? Of course not! If a church has a traditional crowd living in a traditional community then the worse thing a church could do is to contemporize. Hey, I dislike it when particular ministers want to force everyone to contemporize just as much as I dislike attempts to force everyone to traditionalize. That’s just as much of an idolatry as its opposite. Of course, there are far fewer forced contemporizings than forced traditionalizings. Obvious reason for this is that contemporizers often don’t have to force others; they can simply wait patiently for the inevitable. If the Holy Spirit wants it it’s gonna happen.

If you do not believe me, go to a Saturday night service at Fellowship.

Now how about some soap?

5 comments:

Paul Burleson said...

Circenses,

An excellent post-Easter post. I'm a long time reader/fan but first time to comment. I thought it especially good where, with great logic, you pointed out the traditionalists were bending to culture, their own. That's classic.

Another out of sinc with biblical reality line in a song, this one christmas in theme, says "no crying He made." I'm sure they thought since He is God He wouldn't. There was probably no blood and pain present either.

I guess we'll give them a pass along with those you mentioned about the Sabbath. Since they transfer the sabath to Sunday and transfer it from Israel to all and from the old covenant to the new, I guess the pass is well earned. That's a lot of theological hoops to jump through with no biblical materials as it's foundation. They are bound to be tired. Almost as tired as the cultural police in the SBC... but not quite.

Good stuff. Keep it coming

Nicolas Gold said...

Thank you. Oddly enough, the missus and I watched the video Happiest Baby on the Block in preparation for our daughter delivery. The video gives some techniques traditionally used to calm fussy babies. Basically, the techniques reproduce a womb-like environment of which the infant is familiar. The first technique is to swaddle the infant to reproduce the comfortable snugness of the womb. Sure enough, it calms the child. Sure enough, this is a technique that goes back thousands of years. Thus, it’s possible that Mary and Joseph use of the famous “swaddling clothes” (Luke 2:12) did indeed give the barn inhabitants a “silent night”.

But I know exactly what you mean. I think it is more a case of man deciding for themselves what is good and bad and then concluding whatever they themselves deem to be bad is something that would not exist apart from a fallen world or a sinful humanity.

Examples? Crying, yelling, blood, mud, mosquitoes, asteroids and meteors, supernovas, storms, hurricanes, volcanoes and beets.

Yes, there will be poo in glory.

Yes, the Sabbath was created for man and not man for the Sabbath. The Sabbath is a graceful gift of God that he has generally given to all of humanity in every culture through history. Nevertheless, one should not use the Sabbath as an excuse not to serve or save. We cannot be dogmatic about this. I myself prefer to follow Jesus’ example: he worked on the Sabbath when he saw fit and he took instant-sabbaths whenever he needed the time. When he got tired, he withdrew from the crowds and even his own disciples and went into solitude to rest and commune with God. I myself take one every night before bed. I give myself at least 30 minutes to unwind and commune with the Creator. Quite refreshing and calming! In a sense, when I am fussy I go to God and have him “swaddle” me. There’s a nice metaphor for those of you who prefer the “born-again Christian” label.

If one is going to be Pharisaic about resting on the Sabbath then one should be just as Pharisaic about not resting on a non-Sabbath day.

If it makes you feel any better, culture policing has always been an unfortunate part of the lives of believers, going back to the Apostolic Church, going back to Jesus, and going back to the Maccabean period.

Again, thank you, sir, for your kind sentiments. They are appreciated. God Bless.

Paul Burleson said...

Circenses,

Interesting thoughts on the "swaddling clothes." I'm wondering if there might not be more of the fear of the loss of something Divine that creates the denial of the presence of the evidence of His real humanity in the minds of many of those who do so. I guess only they can really say. Better yet, maybe only God knows for sure.

I'd be really interested to know your thoughts on the idea that, while there is certainly biblical evidence for a Sabbath rest principle in creation itself, [He rested on the seventh day...though He didn't call it a Sabbath in Genesis 1-3] the Sabbath was made known to Israel, according to Nehemiah [see Neh. 9:13-14] in conjunction with the covenant and God gave it to them as a special day and sign of that covenant.

This, if valid, would indicate many things perhaps, but certainly that the new covenant would have fulfilled all, including the Sabbath day. Thus we [new covenant people] are in an eternal Sabbath in Christ making every day our day of rest in His Grace as Hebrews says in chapter four.

This has been a challenge for me to investigate and I wonder your take on it.

Nicolas Gold said...

Possibly. Yes, I do know that conservative Southern Baptists have traditionally have often been wary of some Gospel accounts which state that Jesus as the God-Man may have been less than omniscient. Such as the testimony of his growth in wisdom and knowledge and his own admitted ignorance to when the fulfillment of his kingdom would occur. He knew what would happen and that it certainly would happen but God the Father and not yet revealed this bit of information to the Son and Jesus had not asked. How is this possible? I have no idea. I have a friend who holds to the traditional position that Jesus as the God-Man must have been omniscient because God is omniscient and anything less than God is not God. Thus, to deem Jesus as less than omniscient is to deem him “not God”. I myself think that his position does not take into account the necessary complexities of the Incarnation (i.e., God is Spirit and not Flesh and is omnipresent. Jesus is Spirit and Flesh but is not omnipresent because he is Flesh.). His argument is more philosophical (Man’s-wisdom, if I may) than Scriptural (inspired by God’s wisdom). Generally, I think it best to take Scripture over philosophy unless philosophy suggests that we may be misinterpreting Scripture. But always Scripture. Thus, I must believe that Jesus did indeed have some limits accompanying his deity, however difficult it is for my mind to grasp this concept. Thus, it may be that Jesus’ question when the woman touched him (“Who touched me?”) was a legitimate question and not a rhetorical device (Mark 5:30f. and Luke 8:45f.).

Oh, yes. I would certainly say that the New Covenant inaugurated by and in Christ is the fulfillment of the initial gift given to Man by God and given to the Israelites with the Mosaic Covenant. Certainly, we who are identified as believers of God in Christ have entered the Sabbath rest (Hebrews 4). It’s similar to the Kingdom of God which while inaugurated by and in Christ, it will not reach its ultimate fulfillment until the Second Coming of Christ. So while we as believers have that taste of eternity being in Christ, we shall have it in full by remaining in Christ. In this world we now find our rest in Christ. This rest will reach its fulfillment at the Second Coming for all those who are now resting in Christ. This is one way in which the author of Hebrews encourages his Jewish audience to persevere in Christ despite the persecution they are receiving. Whether persecuted or not, man finds rest only in Christ. Those who persevere in Christ will not only find rest in this life but (despite the persecutions of this life) they will only find ultimate rest in Christ and nowhere else.

We should conceive of this Sabbath rest just as we conceive of salvation: involving the entire person (body, spirit and soul). God in Christ saves both our minds and bodies from eternal destruction. God in Christ gives both our minds and bodies rest. God in Christ saves us and we are saved every day. I am saved today and I am saved as long as I am in Christ. Also, God in Christ brings joy and peace both today and tomorrow and as long as we are in Christ.

So we can have everyday as our rest (whatever that means for in individual in his or her relationship with God in Christ) just as long we do not use that understanding either to ignore our stewardship duties (even the pre-Fall Adam and Eve worked and tended the garden) or to work without rest (the Fallen Adam and Eve had increased pains in their respective labors).

Jesus (always at rest in God) took time to rest his Human-Divine body.

I think the matter comes down to average rest in general and ultimate rest in particular found only in Jesus. God gives rest to every creature from insect to Man. It is a gift given by his love for animal and Man. As Jesus said, if Gods looks after the birds of the air and the lilies of the field, will he not look after those he deems much more valuable? But though plants and animals are given rest, being creatures not made in the image of God, they are not given the ultimate rest that believers in Christ receive. And, unfortunately, those men who are made in the image of God but refuse the offer of salvation in Christ, though they were given the general rest offered to all creation, they will not receive the ultimate rest given only in Christ. They will be discarded into eternal destruction as something far more tragic than either plant or animal.

Thank you, pastor. You have stimulated both my thoughts and imagination. God Bless

Paul Burleson said...

Thank you. You have been both enlightening and prompt. I really have enjoyed the conversation and, while differing on perhaps a point or two, find your thoughts, theological understanding, and willingness to articulate them refreshing and just plain fun to examine.

This has been true of ALL your posts a couple of which I've copied and pasted into my research files for future references on some issues. As I said, good stuff.